Moderation and the presidency are two completely different things. Airmax himself mentioned in a debate that the presidency acts as a check and balance on moderation.

Community issues are to be settled by the community, not by the moderator. Airmax has no authority on the matter. If you PM him, he will tell you that he does not have any authority on the matter.

You can't pick and choose checks and balances to your power on a whim. Airmax's job is to represent Juggle. Wylted's job is to represent the interests of the memberbase. The final authority on the matter is Wylted.

So the question you should be asking is: does Wylted endorse a referendum. He doesn't. If you don't want to take my word for it, PM him.

Moderation and the presidency are two completely different things. Airmax himself mentioned in a debate that the presidency acts as a check and balance on moderation.

Community issues are to be settled by the community, not by the moderator. Airmax has no authority on the matter. If you PM him, he will tell you that he does not have any authority on the matter.

You can't pick and choose checks and balances to your power on a whim. Airmax's job is to represent Juggle. Wylted's job is to represent the interests of the memberbase. The final authority on the matter is Wylted.

So the question you should be asking is: does Wylted endorse a referendum. He doesn't. If you don't want to take my word for it, PM him.

I can screenshot a PM which says that Wylted does want a referendum. Unless he's changed his mind in the span of four days, you're lying, as you still are about the idea that Airmax's input is irrelevant.

I'm becoming less defined as days go by, fading away, and well you might say, I'm losing focus, kinda drifting into the abstract in terms of how I see myself.

At 7/14/2016 2:29:25 AM, Subutai wrote:I can screenshot a PM which says that Wylted does want a referendum. Unless he's changed his mind in the span of four days, you're lying, as you still are about the idea that Airmax's input is irrelevant.

Moderation and the presidency are two completely different things. Airmax himself mentioned in a debate that the presidency acts as a check and balance on moderation.

Community issues are to be settled by the community, not by the moderator. Airmax has no authority on the matter. If you PM him, he will tell you that he does not have any authority on the matter.

You can't pick and choose checks and balances to your power on a whim. Airmax's job is to represent Juggle. Wylted's job is to represent the interests of the memberbase. The final authority on the matter is Wylted.

So the question you should be asking is: does Wylted endorse a referendum. He doesn't. If you don't want to take my word for it, PM him.

I can screenshot a PM which says that Wylted does want a referendum. Unless he's changed his mind in the span of four days, you're lying, as you still are about the idea that Airmax's input is irrelevant.

He planned to hold one in three months, halfway through his term, to see if his attempts to reform the presidency had changed anyone's mind.

"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -

Moderation and the presidency are two completely different things. Airmax himself mentioned in a debate that the presidency acts as a check and balance on moderation.

Community issues are to be settled by the community, not by the moderator. Airmax has no authority on the matter. If you PM him, he will tell you that he does not have any authority on the matter.

You can't pick and choose checks and balances to your power on a whim. Airmax's job is to represent Juggle. Wylted's job is to represent the interests of the memberbase. The final authority on the matter is Wylted.

So the question you should be asking is: does Wylted endorse a referendum. He doesn't. If you don't want to take my word for it, PM him.

At 7/14/2016 2:31:11 AM, Torton wrote:It is being settled by the community. Airmax recognizing it gives it legitimacy. If you don't want the presidency to be abolished, then go vote for that. This shouldn't even be a fvcking issue.

Did you even read the OP? The presidency is not being abolished. There is no legitimate referendum to vote on.

Moderation and the presidency are two completely different things. Airmax himself mentioned in a debate that the presidency acts as a check and balance on moderation.

Community issues are to be settled by the community, not by the moderator. Airmax has no authority on the matter. If you PM him, he will tell you that he does not have any authority on the matter.

You can't pick and choose checks and balances to your power on a whim. Airmax's job is to represent Juggle. Wylted's job is to represent the interests of the memberbase. The final authority on the matter is Wylted.

So the question you should be asking is: does Wylted endorse a referendum. He doesn't. If you don't want to take my word for it, PM him.

I can screenshot a PM which says that Wylted does want a referendum. Unless he's changed his mind in the span of four days, you're lying, as you still are about the idea that Airmax's input is irrelevant.

He planned to hold one in three months, halfway through his term, to see if his attempts to reform the presidency had changed anyone's mind.

It seems there's disunity in your camp. F-16 just said that Wylted changed his mind and doesn't support a referendum at all. But even so, what you're saying is irrelevant, because, if the people want a referendum now (which they clearly do), there's no reason Wylted should postpone it for three months instead of doing it now. It just seems like Wylted is desperately trying to hold onto his fraud of a nomination by postponing the referendum as long as possible.

I'm becoming less defined as days go by, fading away, and well you might say, I'm losing focus, kinda drifting into the abstract in terms of how I see myself.

At 7/14/2016 2:31:11 AM, Torton wrote:It is being settled by the community. Airmax recognizing it gives it legitimacy. If you don't want the presidency to be abolished, then go vote for that. This shouldn't even be a fvcking issue.

Did you even read the OP? The presidency is not being abolished. There is no legitimate referendum to vote on.

At 7/14/2016 2:34:00 AM, Subutai wrote:It seems there's disunity in your camp. F-16 just said that Wylted changed his mind and doesn't support a referendum at all. But even so, what you're saying is irrelevant, because, if the people want a referendum now (which they clearly do), there's no reason Wylted should postpone it for three months instead of doing it now. It just seems like Wylted is desperately trying to hold onto his fraud of a nomination by postponing the referendum as long as possible.

At 7/14/2016 2:34:00 AM, Subutai wrote:It seems there's disunity in your camp. F-16 just said that Wylted changed his mind and doesn't support a referendum at all. But even so, what you're saying is irrelevant, because, if the people want a referendum now (which they clearly do), there's no reason Wylted should postpone it for three months instead of doing it now. It just seems like Wylted is desperately trying to hold onto his fraud of a nomination by postponing the referendum as long as possible.

At 7/14/2016 2:34:00 AM, Subutai wrote:It seems there's disunity in your camp. F-16 just said that Wylted changed his mind and doesn't support a referendum at all. But even so, what you're saying is irrelevant, because, if the people want a referendum now (which they clearly do), there's no reason Wylted should postpone it for three months instead of doing it now. It just seems like Wylted is desperately trying to hold onto his fraud of a nomination by postponing the referendum as long as possible.

At 7/14/2016 2:34:00 AM, Subutai wrote:It seems there's disunity in your camp. F-16 just said that Wylted changed his mind and doesn't support a referendum at all. But even so, what you're saying is irrelevant, because, if the people want a referendum now (which they clearly do), there's no reason Wylted should postpone it for three months instead of doing it now. It just seems like Wylted is desperately trying to hold onto his fraud of a nomination by postponing the referendum as long as possible.

I already addressed what you said. We'll know Wylted wants a referendum if and when he posts one. Otherwise, the spam on the front page with ten referenda aren't anything to be taken seriously.

No, nothing in that post addressed my specific points. And nine of those referenda are a result of your pathetic attempts to bury the real one. Those nine should not be taken seriously. However, the legitimate one should be.

I'm becoming less defined as days go by, fading away, and well you might say, I'm losing focus, kinda drifting into the abstract in terms of how I see myself.

At 7/14/2016 2:34:00 AM, Subutai wrote:It seems there's disunity in your camp. F-16 just said that Wylted changed his mind and doesn't support a referendum at all. But even so, what you're saying is irrelevant, because, if the people want a referendum now (which they clearly do), there's no reason Wylted should postpone it for three months instead of doing it now. It just seems like Wylted is desperately trying to hold onto his fraud of a nomination by postponing the referendum as long as possible.

I already addressed what you said. We'll know Wylted wants a referendum if and when he posts one. Otherwise, the spam on the front page with ten referenda aren't anything to be taken seriously.

No, nothing in that post addressed my specific points. And nine of those referenda are a result of your pathetic attempts to bury the real one. Those nine should not be taken seriously. However, the legitimate one should be.

At 7/14/2016 2:34:00 AM, Subutai wrote:It seems there's disunity in your camp. F-16 just said that Wylted changed his mind and doesn't support a referendum at all. But even so, what you're saying is irrelevant, because, if the people want a referendum now (which they clearly do), there's no reason Wylted should postpone it for three months instead of doing it now. It just seems like Wylted is desperately trying to hold onto his fraud of a nomination by postponing the referendum as long as possible.

I already addressed what you said. We'll know Wylted wants a referendum if and when he posts one. Otherwise, the spam on the front page with ten referenda aren't anything to be taken seriously.

The question is not "if" it's when, which was agreed to be this Wednesday on Sunday. So if Wylted wants to make a refferendum thread, then he only has a few hours to do so. Max has already recognized YYW's as legit.

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-Lannan13'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

If the sky's the limit then why do we have footprints on the Moon? I'm shooting my aspirations for the stars.

"If you are going through hell, keep going." "Sir Winston Churchill

"No one can make you feel inferior without your consent." "Eleanor Roosevelt